Chris Lombardi puts defense and security under the spotlight, as he shares his takes on recent NATO and EU cooperation and provides insight into the company’s own long-term strategic partnerships in Europe.

Three trends are currently driving the global electricity sector: decarbonization, decentralization and differentiation. Utilities are making significant contributions to mitigate carbon emissions, while a technology revolution is …

Mixed view of performance as Parliament rings down final curtain

THE present European Parliament’s term in office has coincided with some of the most momentous events in the EU’s history: the introduction of the euro, the biggest-ever expansion of the Union to 25 members and the likely adoption of a European constitution.

European Voice

5/5/04, 5:00 PM CET

Updated 4/12/14, 10:05 AM CET

But exactly what impact has the Parliament had on all this?

With the present legislature drawing its mandate to an end and new MEPs set to be elected in the 10-13 June elections, European Voice asked Brussels’ business representatives and NGOs to assess the Parliament’s five-year term in office.

“Not bad, but could have done better,” is the verdict that the fifth legislature since direct elections were first held in 1979 receives from the Brussels-jury.

The Parliament, which as the only elected EU institution confers democratic legitimacy to the Union, has evolved from a previously irrelevant talking shop into a mature lawmaking body, with deputies having the opportunity to amend or reject two-thirds of EU legislation, under the co-decision procedure.

The present legislature may not have done anything quite so dramatic as the one before, which famously forced the European Commission led by Jacques Santer to resign in 1999.

But in which areas has the assembly left its mark?

Business record

Questioned about the outgoing Parliament in terms of encouraging competitiveness, Philippe de Buck, the secretary-general of employers’ union UNICE, said: “The picture is mixed – there were a lot of positive but also negative results.

“Take, for example, Parliament’s first reading vote on software patents, which could, if not considerably amended by the Council [of Ministers], be disastrous for Europe’s competitiveness. By contrast, Parliament’s improvement of the 2nd railway package and of consumer enforcement cooperation was positive.”

Regarding the future, de Buck notes “that European business expects the next Parliament to push harder to achieve the objectives of the Lisbon Agenda. We would like the next Parliament to see itself as the ‘Lisbon Parliament’…in order to be able to create growth, jobs and prosperity.”

Meanwhile, the Association of European Chambers of Commerce and Industry gives Parliament the thumbs-up for helping steer through the euro, the draft constitution and enlargement.

But Secretary-General Arnaldo Abruzzini adds: “On the other hand, there are two areas where this Parliament did not do so well.

“It did not push enough economic issues, such as competitiveness and the Lisbon Agenda – which are of major importance for Europe’s future – and should aim in future, like the Commission, to cut the amount of legislation, and not to increase it.”

Conversely, the record volume of legislation handled by this Parliament is a source of pride to its President, Pat Cox.

It has handled 400 cases of co-decision and only failed to reach agreement with the Council of Ministers in two.

Furthermore, one-third of these co-decision matters have been dealt with at first reading.

“We have doubled the amount of legislation on the previous Parliament,” says Cox, adding: “Ours is the only EU institution with a 100% delivery record on economic reform.”

The jury is split on Parliament’s mixed success in social and environmental policy.

Social record

Giampiero Alhadeff, secretary-general of Solidar, the international network of social, development and humanitarian aid NGOs, admits the Parliament, together with the NGOs, pushed to have a social dimension in the constitution.

“Without the Parliament, we are not confident that equality between women and men or the fight against discrimination and social exclusion would have found the right place in the draft treaty,” he said.

Anne-Sophie Parent, president of Social Platform, a group of 40 NGOs, gives “full marks to the European Parliament for building stronger relations with civil society”.

“Fewer marks, though, for its inability to define itself a strong enough role in relation to the Lisbon Agenda – the dominant strategic development during this term,” she said. “There is a need for leadership in integrating the social and economic elements of Lisbon and Parliament has not yet been able to fully meet this challenge.”

Environment test

On the institution’s green record, Martin Rocholl, director of Friends of the Earth Europe, says: “Parliament has, in general, given environmental concerns more consideration than the Council and, therefore, has often played a positive role.”

Successes over the past five years include introduction of legislation on genetically modified organisms (GMOs) as well as the emission-trading scheme, to help tackle climate change.

However, “the weak environmental liability directive and the directive regulating the recycling of old cars, which was watered down by Parliament, are two examples of where it disappointed”, he said. Rocholl also identifies MEPs from Parliament’s largest political group, the European People’s Party-European Democrats (EPP-ED) as being the least green: “The voting behaviour towards the environment does not differ much between Parliament’s political groups but the EPP-ED does the least for the environment.”

Meanwhile, Tim Evans, of think-tank Centre for the New Europe, claims Parliament has “systematically failed to address many of the key structural problems Europe faces and has failed to enact meaningful, practical and substantive reforms.

“It could have championed the case for Europeans to create more wealth and encouraged greater opportunity”.

“With low growth rates, high unemployment and failing state services, it is vital the Parliament now wakes up,” he warns.

Not surprisingly, Parliament’s leaders put a positive spin on its impact, with EPP-ED chairman Hans-Gert Pöttering applauding its “two great achievements” – the constitution and enlargement.

However, despite being widely credited with having done far more than any previous president to raise the assembly’s profile, Irishman Cox readily admits that much more still needs to be done to sell the Parliament’s merits to a sceptical public.

But the present legislature also leaves behind “unfinished business” – the failure to tackle the Commission’s chemicals overhaul plan, the general services directive and the tenth company law directive on cross-border mergers.

All are very important for Europe’s industry.

The most infamous leftover, however, is MEPs’ failure to reform their own pay and perks system.

Pat Cox’s priority as president of the assembly has been the adoption of a statute for members, setting out a single salary for all MEPs and reforming the presently opaque and lavish expenses system.

Failure to do so, coupled with reports of abuses by MEPs of the present system, are likely to have a negative effect during the electoral campaign for the June polls.

It is generally felt that voters will be inclined to punish Parliament for its gravy-train image, either by not bothering to vote, which is likely to lead to a historically low turnout, or by voting for protest-parties, such as Eurosceptic or far-right ones.

The keynote speaker at the 20th anniversary celebration of the European Medicines Agency offered some challenges to conventional thinking about the next 20 years – including carefully calculated provocations of his hosts.